The study of character in leadership cannot be totally separated from attention to the unique context within which the leader acts or from the study of the consequences of the leader's actions. We respond to the five questions raised by Hannah and Avolio (in press) while enlarging the dialogue along several new lines of thought. We honor the importance of leadership science while emphasizing the art of the leader who masters the practice of leadership. While there is no universal, one best way to lead or one enduring and integrative theory of leadership, we remain convinced of the significant role of character in the study of leadership.